No.
10-6003/AF. U.S. v. Rachel K. BRADFORD. CCA 2009-07.On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the
decision of
the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, on appeal by the
United
States under Article 62, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §
862 (2000), it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted.

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No.
10-0283/AR.U.S. v. Jason A. LOUIS.CCA 20090022.

No.
10-0284/AF.U.S. v. Chane JACKSON.CCA S31526.

No.
10-0285/AF.U.S. v. Heath R. WARE.CCA 37351.

No.
10-0286/AF.U.S. v. Rosemarie P. STALEY.CCA S31644.

No.
10-0287/AF.U.S. v. Ryan E. McELHENY.CCA 37340.

No.
10-0288/AR.U.S. v. B.J. D. WARE.CCA 20090658.

No.
10-0289/AR.U.S. v. Gary THOMAS, Jr.CCA 20090219.

No.
10-0290/AF.U.S. v. Steven D. LUCAS.CCA 37363.

UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY
JOURNAL

No.
10-111

Thursday,
February 25, 2010

APPEALS - SUMMARY
DISPOSITIONS

No.
08-0580/AR.U.S. v. Brandon I. MILLER.CCA 20060224.On consideration of the petition for grant of
review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal
Appeals,
said petition is hereby granted, and the decision of the United States
Army
Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.[See also ORDERS GRANTING
PETITION FOR
REVIEW this date.]

Misc.
No. 10-8011/AF.Ray P. DIAL, Petitioner,
v. United States,
Respondent. Notice is hereby given that a petition for
extraordinary relief was filed by mail under Rule 27(a) on November 25,
2009,
and placed on the docket this date.On
consideration thereof, it is
ordered that said petition is hereby denied.

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

No.
09-0648/AR.U.S. v. Donald A. WOOLFOLK.CCA 20070684. Appellant's
motion for leave to file the
supplement to the petition for grant of review out of time granted.

MANDATES ISSUED

No.
08-0804/AR.U.S. v. Sabrina D. HARMAN.CCA 20050597.

No. 09-0169/AR.U.S. v. Michael J. SMITH.CCA 20060541.

UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY
JOURNAL

No.
10-109

Tuesday,
February 23, 2010

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW DENIED

No.
10-0028/AR.U.S. v. James P. CHILDS, JR.CCA 20081054.

No.
10-0145/AF.U.S. v. Jesus PANETO, Jr.CCA 37342.

No.
10-0165/AR.U.S.
v. Sanford
O.
STENSON, Jr.CCA20090236.

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No.
10-0278/AR.U.S. v. Whitney M. ONEAL.CCA 20080772.

No.
10-0279/AR.U.S. v. Robert L. GREENE,
Jr.CCA 20090532.

No.
10-0280/MC.U.S. v. Xavier
MIRANDA-ZAPATA.CCA200800865.

UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY
JOURNAL

No.
10-108

Monday,
February 22, 2010

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

No.
09-0731/AR.U.S. v. Lonnie L. FOSTER.CCA 20060930.

No.
10-0137/AR.U.S. v. James A. ROY.CCA 20080656.

No.
10-0139/NA.U.S. v. Charles D. MYERS.CCA 200800759.

No.
10-0141/MC.U.S. v. Jonathan L. YOUNG.CCA 200900116.

No.
10-0142/AR.U.S. v. Daryl L. BRYANT.CCA 20080619.

No.
10-0233/AF.U.S. v. Jessie GAINES III.CCA 37429.

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No.
10-0277/AR.U.S. v. Lon M. DIMMITT.CCA 20090580.

PETITIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION DENIED

No. 09-5004/NA.United States,
Appellee v. Raymond L. NEAL, Appellant.CCA 200800746.On
consideration
of Appellant’s petition for reconsideration of this Court’s decision, United
States v. Neal, 68 M.J. 289 (C.A.A.F. 2010), it is ordered that
said
petition for reconsideration be, and the same is, hereby denied.

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

No.
07-0401/NA.U.S. v. Russell B. MULLINS.CCA 200200988. Appellant's
second motion to extend time to file a brief
granted, up to and including February 26, 2010,
and no further extension of time will be granted to Appellant in this
case.

No.
10-6006/AF.U.S. v. Charles L. WALTON.CCA 2009-11. Appellant's
motion to extend time to file the
supplement to the petition for grant of review granted, up to and
including
March 11, 2010.

UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY
JOURNAL

No.
10-107

Friday,
February 19, 2010

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF
REVIEW DENIED

No.
10-0239/AR.U.S. v. Michael W. KNOX, Jr.CCA 20080908.

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No.
10-0275/NA.U.S. v. Matthew C. WEBB.CCA 200900486.

No.
10-0276/AR.U.S. v. Clarence A. HARRIS
III.CCA 20080854.

No.
10-6006/AF.U.S. v. Charles L. WALTON.CCA 2009-11.

MANDATES ISSUED

No.
09-0145/AR.U.S. v. Christine N.
THOMPSON.CCA 20060901.

UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY
JOURNAL

No.
10-106

Thursday,
February 18, 2010

ORDERS GRANTING
PETITION FOR REVIEW

No. 10-0033/AR.U.S. v. Jerry PEARSON, Jr.CCA 20080802.On consideration of the petition for grant of
review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal
Appeals, the
Court notes that the Appellant has assigned a single issue:

WHETHER TANGIBLE
EVIDENCE
EXISTS IN THE RECORD OF TRIAL INDICATING THE CONVENING AUTHORITY
CONSIDERED APPELLANT'S
TWO WRITTEN CLEMENCY STATEMENTS PRIOR TO TAKING ACTION.

Although they are
summarized
in the Rule for Courts-Martial (R.C.M.) 1105 memorandum presented to
the
convening authority, and listed as attachments to it, the two
statements which
are the subject of the petition are not in the record as received by
this
Court.They are also not listed in the
convening authority’s enumeration of documents that he considered in
the course
of his decision on the Appellant’s request for clemency.In this posture, we cannot determine whether
the convening authority considered the statements in arriving at his
decision,
as required.Article 60(c)(2), Uniform
Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 860(c)(2) (2000); R.C.M.
1107(b)(3)(A)(iii). Accordingly it is ordered that said petition is
granted on
the assigned issue.The decision of the
United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is set aside, and the
record is
returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Army for a remand to the
Court of
Criminal Appeals.The Court of Criminal
Appeals shall conduct fact-finding to determine if the statements were
considered by the convening authority; if it determines that they were
not, the
Court of Criminal Appeals may remand the record to the convening
authority for
a new action.

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW DENIED

No. 10-0216/AF.U.S.
v. F. Kale ENGLISH.CCA 37434.

PETITIONS FOR GRANT OF REVIEW FILED

No. 10-0274/NA.U.S. v. Christopher L.
REYHER.CCA 200900407.

MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET - FILINGS

Misc. No.
10-8010/AF.James L. MILLER v. United States,
Respondent.Notice is hereby given that a
petition for
extraordinary relief in the nature of a writ of mandamus was filed
under Rule
27(a).

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

No. 07-0253/NA.U.S.
v. John A. HALSEMA.CCA 20001337. Appellee's motion to stay proceedings granted,
up to and including April 6, 2010.

No. 08-0683/AR.U.S.
v. Sydonna A. JONES.CCA 20060821. Appellant's second
motion to extend time to file the supplement to the
petition for grant of review granted, up
to and including February 23, 2010, and absent extraordinary
circumstances, no
further extension of time will be granted in this case.

No. 09-0731/AR.U.S.
v. Lonnie L. FOSTER.CCA 20060930. On
consideration of Appellant’s motion
for leave to file additional matters pursuant to United States v.
Grostefon,
12 M.J. 431 (C.M.A. 1982), filed October 27, 2009, motion for leave to
file out
of time and motion for leave to file additional matters pursuant to United
States v. Grostefon, 12 M.J. 431 (C.M.A. 1982), filed November 12,
2009, it
is ordered that said motion for leave to file additional
matters pursuant to United States v. Grostefon, 12 M.J. 431
(C.M.A.
1982), filed October 27, 2009, is hereby granted;
that said motion for leave to file out of time and motion for leave to
file
additional matters pursuant to United States v. Grostefon, 12
M.J. 431
(C.M.A. 1982), filed November 12, 2009, are hereby denied.

No. 10-0267/NA.U.S.
v. Donald L. E. KIVEL.CCA 200800638. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the
supplement to the petition for grant of review granted, up to and
including
March 9, 2010.

No. 10-0272/MC.U.S.
v. Timothy J. HALL.CCA 200900119. Appellant's motion to extend time to file the
supplement to the petition for grant of review granted, up to and
including
March 9, 2010.

WHETHER THE
MILITARY JUDGE ERRED TO
THE
SUBSTANTIAL PREJUDICE OF THE ACCUSED BY FAILING TO ORDER DISCLOSURE OF
MEMOS
THAT SET OUT APPROVED “ENHANCED INTERROGATION TACTICS” FOR HANDLING
DETAINEES
IN UNITED STATES CUSTODY.

WHETHER THE
MILITARY JUDGE ABUSED HIS
DISCRETION AND COMMITTED PREJUDICIAL ERROR BY EXCLUDING THE TESTIMONY
OF MAJOR
PONCE; THE E-MAIL AUTHORED BY MAJOR PONCE (DEF EX G FOR ID); AND THE
FAVORABLE
DEFENSE EXPERT TESTIMONY BY MR. THOMAS J. ARCHAMBAULT.

Misc. No.
10-8009/AF.United States, Appellant v.
Lieutenant Colonel Vance H. Spath, USAF, Appellee and Senior Airman
Nicole A.
Anderson, Real Party In Interest.CCA
2009-18.Notice is
hereby given that a writ-appeal petition by the United States
for review of the
decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals on
application for extraordinary relief was filed under Rule 27(b).

INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS

No.
07-0401/NA.U.S. v. Russell B. MULLINS.CCA 200200988. Appellant's
motion to extend time to file the
brief granted, but only up to and
including February 23, 2010, and absent extraordinary circumstances, no
further
extension of time will be granted in this case.

No.
10-0261/AF.U.S. v. Renato S. DEL
CARPIO.CCA 37276. Appellate's
motion to extend time to file the
supplement to the petition for grant of review granted, up to and
including
March 4, 2010.

_________________________

*Second
petition filed in this case.

UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY
JOURNAL

No.
10-102

Thursday,
February 4, 2010

APPEALS - SUMMARY
DISPOSITIONS

No. 04-0698/MC.U.S. v. Javier
A. MORENO, Jr.CCA 200100715.On
consideration of the petition for grant of review
of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine
Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, said petition is hereby granted, and,
the
decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal
Appeals is
affirmed.[See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

No.
10-0074/AR.U.S. v. Samuel J. PERRY.CCA 20071338.On consideration of the petition for grant of
review of the decision of the United States Army
Court of Criminal Appeals, said petition is hereby granted, and the
decision of
the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.[See also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW
this date.]

Misc. No.
10-8008/AR.Shaun K. BRASINGTON,
Petitioner v. United
States,
Respondent.CCA 20060033.Notice is hereby given that a petition for
extraordinary relief in the nature of a writ of prohibition was filed
under
Rule 27(a).

MANDATES ISSUED

No. 08-0339/AF.U.S.
v. Derrick M. WILLIAMS.CCA 36679.

UNITED
STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

DAILY
JOURNAL

No.
10-099

Monday,
February 1, 2010

APPEALS - SUMMARY
DISPOSITIONS

No. 10-0135/MC.U.S. v. Jerrod
M. GLASS.CCA 200800743.On
consideration of the petition for grant of review
of the decision of the United States Navy-Marine
Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, said petition is hereby
granted, and the decision of the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court
of
Criminal Appeals is affirmed.* [See
also ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.]

No.
09-0535/NA.U.S. v. Matthew M. DIAZ.CCA 200700970. On
consideration of the motions filed by
PepperdineUniversityLawSchool
to appear as
Amicus Curiae, to present oral argument, to file brief on behalf of
Amicus
Curiae out of time, and to allow appearance of law students, it is
ordered that
said motions are hereby granted.

___________________

*It is directed
that the promulgating order be
corrected to reflect that members with enlisted representation adjudged
the
sentence, vice the military judge.